In a normal Yahoo league, if I have a player in a roster spot...say C. If his team is scheduled for an early game and he ends up riding pine for that game. Why should the roster spot be locked? Why shouldn't I be able to go in and replace him with my backup C who plays tonight, provided that the original C hasn't become active in the early game yet?

I guess I can see it both ways, but I can't find a compelling argument why it would not be better to allow you to bench a player even if his game has started if he is himself benched in that game...

You can't predict that he won't come into the game at some point, just because he doesn't start doesn't mean he won't play. By having him in the lineup at the time of the game you are making a decision to play him for whatever he does in that game.

byfrcp wrote:You can't predict that he won't come into the game at some point, just because he doesn't start doesn't mean he won't play. By having him in the lineup at the time of the game you are making a decision to play him for whatever he does in that game.

I understand that with the current rules, that I'm committing to him when the game starts. I just don't know if it really makes much sense to have such a rule.

Why would you need to predict anything? If he starts playing at some point in the game, the spot is locked because he is active. If he never plays in the game, why lock the slot?

Maybe this is to allow people to have lives outside of FBB and not be at a disadvantage to league mates who spend every minute checking their rosters and activating/deactivating their players based on whether they get starts or not?

Much of this comes back to the same reasoning behind locking down players whose game is rained out. Our actual scoring is based upon official, overnight statistics. Completely independent of this, we get real-time stats during the days. However, this feed of data is subject to completely different constraints and guarantees, and is not official. If we get incorrect overnight statistics, we can correct them after the fact. However, if we get incorrect real-time data, and you change your roster based upon that, we can't put the toothpaste back in the tube and correct it; there is no room for, "I wouldn't have put that guy in my lineup if I'd realized that my other catcher actually played.", or whatever similar situation might arise. Now imagine the situation where one owner in a league gets caught by an inaccuracy in the unofficial real-time stats and another doesn't; that is an angry owner.

In situations like this, one of our guiding principles is to try to make sure that we can apply the same, consistent rules to all owners. If we ended up effectively basing the official scoring on your league on unofficial real-time data, we couldn't reliably guarantee that fairness. So even if the current state of things will sometime lead to arguably sub-optimal consequences, it is the same for all managers.

I agree with the consensus here that a roster spot should be locked in this situation.

However, I had another situation come up today with regards to locked roster spots that I'd be curious to hear thoughts on.

I checked my team around 6:45 to see if any of my players weren't starting in the 7 p.m. games, and saw that Ellsbury was not going to be in the lineup (game hadn't started yet). On my bench I had Melvin Mora, who was going to be playing (game hadn't started yet). Of course, Mora is not an OF... but in my IF spot I had the ever-versatile Chris Duncan, who had already played. I was hoping I could move Duncan from IF to OF (in no way gaining an advantage by knowledge of what happened in his game) and then slide Mora in at IF. Alas, no can do.

I'm not mad about this in the slightest, but it did get me thinking that it would be cool if we could move players who had already played to different positions in our lineups as long as we don't remove them. You really don't get any knowledge advantage here, it just gives you some added flexibility. Anyone agree? Disagree?

Fantasy Sports Genie wrote:Much of this comes back to the same reasoning behind locking down players whose game is rained out. Our actual scoring is based upon official, overnight statistics. Completely independent of this, we get real-time stats during the days. However, this feed of data is subject to completely different constraints and guarantees, and is not official. If we get incorrect overnight statistics, we can correct them after the fact. However, if we get incorrect real-time data, and you change your roster based upon that, we can't put the toothpaste back in the tube and correct it; there is no room for, "I wouldn't have put that guy in my lineup if I'd realized that my other catcher actually played.", or whatever similar situation might arise. Now imagine the situation where one owner in a league gets caught by an inaccuracy in the unofficial real-time stats and another doesn't; that is an angry owner.

In situations like this, one of our guiding principles is to try to make sure that we can apply the same, consistent rules to all owners. If we ended up effectively basing the official scoring on your league on unofficial real-time data, we couldn't reliably guarantee that fairness. So even if the current state of things will sometime lead to arguably sub-optimal consequences, it is the same for all managers.

Hope that helps clear it up.

Thanks for the explanation. I can appreciate that you have broader concerns than my specific preferences.

Spartans Rule wrote:I agree with the consensus here that a roster spot should be locked in this situation.

However, I had another situation come up today with regards to locked roster spots that I'd be curious to hear thoughts on.

I checked my team around 6:45 to see if any of my players weren't starting in the 7 p.m. games, and saw that Ellsbury was not going to be in the lineup (game hadn't started yet). On my bench I had Melvin Mora, who was going to be playing (game hadn't started yet). Of course, Mora is not an OF... but in my IF spot I had the ever-versatile Chris Duncan, who had already played. I was hoping I could move Duncan from IF to OF (in no way gaining an advantage by knowledge of what happened in his game) and then slide Mora in at IF. Alas, no can do.

I'm not mad about this in the slightest, but it did get me thinking that it would be cool if we could move players who had already played to different positions in our lineups as long as we don't remove them. You really don't get any knowledge advantage here, it just gives you some added flexibility. Anyone agree? Disagree?

i don't really agree with you here. to me once a player's game has started he should be locked. where you have him set in your lineup up to that point is up to you.

on another note, ESPN still has the upper hand over Yahoo in allowing add/drop up until the first game of the current day. with Yahoo you still have to make those transactions before midnight. IMO Yahoo keeps falling behind more and more as ESPN adds better features and a better (and now more reliable) interface.